CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 18 mars 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 7 April 2025   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 23926/18 Valentina GAICIUC against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 4 May 2018 communicated on 18 March 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the alleged breach of the applicant’s right of access to a court contrary to Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, on account of the Supreme Court of Justice’s refusal to examine the applicant’s appeal on points of law because of her failure to pay court fees for that purpose. At the introduction of her civil claim against a private party, the applicant paid court fees corresponding to three percent of her pecuniary claim, as provided for by the legal provisions in force at the material time. Having disagreed with the decisions of the lower courts, the applicant appealed on points of law submitting proof of payment of court fees for those proceedings. However, by a final ruling of 14 November 2017, the Supreme Court refused to accept for examination the applicant’s appeal on points of law and invited her to pay court fees in an amount higher than foreseen by the relevant legal provisions, without providing any details for such a ruling. The applicant complains of a breach of her right of access to a court (Article 6 § 1 of the Convention).   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the applicant have access to a court for the determination of her civil rights and obligations, in accordance with Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, regard being had to the fact that her appeal on points of law had not been examined on the merits for her failure to pay court fees requested by the Supreme Court of Justice (see Clionov v. Moldova , no. 13229/04, §   39, 9   October 2007; Istrate v. Moldova (no. 2) , no. 28790/03, § 19, 10   June 2008)?